FINALLY - I Think I Get The Message.

[cmcoins2000]

eBay do not want Sellers.

They only want Buyers.

[digital*ghost]

---

@black*poppy wrote:

That needs clarifying.. I understood it was only for sellers that sold items on the UK/US websites, ie you are a registered seller on ebay.com. or ebay.co.uk.  

---

No, the protection is available to all buyers who reside in the US or UK, with an account in those respective countries. 

If you go to the Legal section of PayPal, you can view the user agreements applicable to each country.

https://www.paypal.com/au/webapps/mpp/ua/legalhub-full

But in the Oz agreement, it states:

12. Recovery of payments owed

12.1 When you receive a payment through our Services, usually we have not yet received payment in full from the buyer. From the time that you receive the payment, you will owe us for the amount of the transaction (including any applicable fees imposed on us), and that liability will be cancelled only when we receive irrevocable payment in full. Events that could lead to us not receiving payment in full include:

The funds received being later invalidated for any reason;

The funds received being subject to a Chargeback;

A Reversal occurring;

Our determination under the PayPal Buyer Protection Policy or Payment Review that the funds received should be returned or reversed;

or You having received payment from a PayPal account holder in another country and we determine under the PayPal Buyer Protection Policy of that country that the funds received should be returned or reversed.

That bascially means if you sell to a buyer in another country, their buyer protection eligibility and requirements will take precedence.

And if you switch to the UK agreement, under buyer protection:

Open a Dispute within 45 days (or, if you are claiming as a registered UK resident user of PayPal, 180 days)of the date on which you made the payment for the purchase you would like to dispute. 

In the US the extension doesn't take effect until November 18, so you won't find it in the current UA, but when you visit the upcoming amendments page, it says it all pretty explicitly, as well:

"PayPal’s Seller Protection and Buyer Protection policies may vary from country to country. If you as a seller, sell an item to a buyer from another country, you will be subject to the Buyer and Seller Protection policies applicable to your buyer’s country and required to reimburse PayPal for any payment or refund to your buyer made pursuant to that other country’s policy."

[casbit33]

According to Australian Consumer Law - A private seller does not have to give a refund, replacement or repair to anyone whether or not the item is sold at a garage  sale, classified ad or online.   . But even shops don't have to give a refund simply because someone changes their mind. This new policy breaches Australian Law.

[cq_tech]

Furthermore, Australian Consumer Law imposes upon consumers certain statutory rights and nothing that eBay tries to introduce can in any way abrogate those statutory rights, and any attempt by eBay to do so is also a breach of Australian Law. This applies to both private sellers and registered businesses.

[cmcoins2000]

---

@cq_tech wrote:
Furthermore, Australian Consumer Law imposes upon consumers certain statutory rights and nothing that eBay tries to introduce can in any way abrogate those statutory rights, and any attempt by eBay to do so is also a breach of Australian Law. This applies to both private sellers and registered businesses.

---

Indeed, CQ.

The only problem I can forsee is no-one having a go at them for these breaches.

Too many worried about the hip pocket - concerned they will be 'descriminated' against by the 'powers that be'.

Really won't matter - eventually this DSR rubbish will take its toll on us all.

[cq_tech]

I don't really see a problem, Helen. If eBay intend thumbing their noses at, and breaching Australian Consumer Law, I have no doubt whatsoever that the ACCC will step in and put a stop to it very quickly indeed. They're not the toothless tiger that so many people seem to believe they are and when our laws are being broken as blatantly as eBay are attempting, they're going to discover just how much power and authority the ACCC really has.

Unfortunately, the DSRs are a completely different matter and all we can hope is that doing our best as sellers will be good enough to allow us to continue as such. Our buyers really do have our fate in their hands.

[cmcoins2000]

---

@cq_tech wrote:
I don't really see a problem, Helen. If eBay intend thumbing their noses at, and breaching Australian Consumer Law, I have no doubt whatsoever that the ACCC will step in and put a stop to it very quickly indeed. They're not the toothless tiger that so many people seem to believe they are and when our laws are being broken as blatantly as eBay are attempting, they're going to discover just how much power and authority the ACCC really has.

Unfortunately, the DSRs are a completely different matter and all we can hope is that doing our best as sellers will be good enough to allow us to continue as such. Our buyers really do have our fate in their hands.

---

Think it has a lot to do with the number of complaints the ACCC receive - same as Fair Trading.

Had an instance where I had some electrical work done - 2 power points replaced, 1 dicky switch in a mounting of 3 switches & the 'tech' told me the 2 'light power switches' in the mains should be 'Protected Power'.

Had the 3 items done to the tune of (Pensioner Rates) $914.70.

Got up off the floor - was the only one at home at the time - paid the account - then sat & thought.

Emailed the company for the License No. for the 'Tech' - received a copy of the Company License - not good enough says I - all electrical & plumbing need a license.

Waited a week or so & was sent a copy of the 'Tech's' License - dated would you believe a week or so after the job was done - which shower did they think.

To make a long story short took it to Fair Trading - they sent me to NCAT - total was refunded even before NCAT happened.

The guy I dealt with from Fair Trading asked if he could come look at the job - sure be my guest.

He then proceeded to ask if I would stand up in court - decidedly - was told they note the number of complaints received - sadly not many bother just wear it.

This lot - it came out later simply changed the name of the company in the yellow pages every year.

Even took them to Work Cover - as I was told by the CEO - hello - they had approx 60 - 80 'technicians' ie. contractors - the question being if they earnt 80% of their annual income from the same source - they were considered employees.

Also Fair Work - if they are indeed employees they are entitled to - holiday pay, super, sick days etc etc.

I actually had a thank you from both and the assurance they were being investigated - thoroughly.

Heavens - that is long winded - Sorry.

[digital*ghost]

The angle that I would be looking at this from is whether eBay can ask its sellers to comply with the terms - if they can, then they can't get into trouble for enforcing them, because by using the site once the policies are in force, a member has agreed to comply. In other words, is it ok for them to make it so that if you sell on eBay (which is voluntary), you have to be prepared to provide (let's just call them) consumer guarantees above and beyond what you would normally be required to offer. 

I don't know the answer to this question, but I think it's the most important one to ask at this stage.

[cmcoins2000]

---

@digital*ghost wrote:

The angle that I would be looking at this from is whether eBay can ask its sellers to comply with the terms - if they can, then they can't get into trouble for enforcing them, because by using the site once the policies are in force, a member has agreed to comply. In other words, is it ok for them to make it so that if you sell on eBay (which is voluntary), you have to be prepared to provide (let's just call them) consumer guarantees above and beyond what you would normally be required to offer. 

I don't know the answer to this question, but I think it's the most important one to ask at this stage.

---

From my experience with the law - if the law is being broken - no User Agreement, Contract or whatever is worth the paper it is written on.

Had an instance where a Lease was drawn for agistment purposes.

The landlord had several 100 acres - agisted to a number of others also.

One lot were using the first property to get to the second - effectively the property had been leased twice.

The landlord was made put up a fence along the side of the property for ingress & egress & ordered to reduce the rent on the land lost, repair gates etc - so that the first could lock a gate & the second had their own entry.

[5kazam]

From eBay Money Back Guarantee > Other Terms

Other terms

• Buyers and sellers permit us to make final decisions about all cases, including appeals.

• We may provide buyers and sellers with access to each other's names, user IDs, contact information, and other information relating to a request.

• When a buyer and seller don't speak the same language, we may assist with communication until the issue is resolved.

• The eBay Money Back Guarantee is not a product warranty, and does not replace your Australian Consumer Law rights.

• In some situations, we may open and decide on a request on behalf of the buyer. This includes situations in which a seller is suspended for fraudulent activity.

• For items shipped through the Global Shipping Program, the program's terms and conditions for buyers describe how members are protected by the eBay Money Back Guarantee.

• We reserve the right to fix any processing errors we discover by debiting or crediting the payment method used for the incorrect refund or reimbursement.

  Maybe I'm reading this incorrectly, but if eBay makes a final decision in favour of the buyer, isn't it in fact then abrogating the seller's 'warranty/refund policy' on the item sold?  Actually taking over as the arbiter of the product - and making a sight unseen decision.

  And I definitely think seller's should watch out on point 2.  Recent posts about personal information being given to a notorious buyer!!  The release of contact information should be a breach of the Privacy Act, and does leave the door open for the not so nice in our society.

[digital*ghost]

---

@cmcoins2000 wrote:

---

@digital*ghost wrote:

The angle that I would be looking at this from is whether eBay can ask its sellers to comply with the terms - if they can, then they can't get into trouble for enforcing them, because by using the site once the policies are in force, a member has agreed to comply. In other words, is it ok for them to make it so that if you sell on eBay (which is voluntary), you have to be prepared to provide (let's just call them) consumer guarantees above and beyond what you would normally be required to offer. 

I don't know the answer to this question, but I think it's the most important one to ask at this stage.

---

From my experience with the law - if the law is being broken - no User Agreement, Contract or whatever is worth the paper it is written on.

---

I get that, but what law is being broken? Is there a law saying that eBay can't require members to refund whenever an item is not as described? (I understand the potential for abuse these rules have, but the repercussions and/or how they are handled by eBay is an issue separate from the one I'm trying to get at). 

It's all very well and good to know and understand that a lot of sellers might not be legally obligated to refund a buyer in some / most / all / whatever circumstances, that's not the issue. What is the issue , or more to the point, what I don't know is whether eBay (or PayPal for that matter) can require a seller to refund in these circumstances as a condition of selling here. 

To put it another way, retailers do not have to accept change of mind returns, they're not legally obliged to at all. But if they put a sign up saying "No questions asked return policy", then they are legally obliged to uphold that. Selling on eBay is now going to mean a bunch of signs are in your proverbial window, and because using eBay is voluntary, can it at all be deemed that the signs are accepted voluntarily just the same as in the retailer's change of mind sign? 

Would Westfield be able to say that any retailer wishing to hold space in one of their centres has to be able to offer change of mind returns?  i.e. How far can the conditions of use actually go?